New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled out the 1994 Ismail Farooqi case related to the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid. The Bench of three Supreme Court judges declared its decision according to the decision of 2-1 (party-opposition). According to the decision now this decision will not go to the big bench.
Three judges were included in the bench. Justices Ashok Bhushan read the decision of Chief Justice Deepak Mishra, while Justice Nazir read his decision separately. The hearing on the Ayodhya case (title suit) will start on October 29.
Justice Ashok Bhushan read out his decision saying that every decision is made in different circumstances. He said that it is important to understand the context of the previous decisions (1994). Justice Bhushan said that in the last verdict, praying to pray in the mosque was not an interim part of Islam, but it is also related to a next sentence.
Justice Bhushan said on behalf of himself and Chief Justice Deepak Mishra that there is no need to send this matter to the big bench. It was 1994’s decision that we need to understand it. The last decision that was given was according to land acquisition only.
Judge Nazir disagreed with the decision of both the judges He said that he does not agree with the matter of fellow judges. That is, the verdict on this matter came in 2-1. Justice Nazir said that in 2010, the Allahabad Court verdict had come, it came under the influence of 1994 judgment. This meant that the matter should have been in the big back.
Let me tell you that in 1994 the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court had instructed to maintain status quo in Ram Janmabhoomi case in Ismail Farooqui case so that Hindu worship can be done. The Bench also said that reading Namaz in the mosque is not an essential part of Islam. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court gave a third Hindus, one-third of the Muslims and one-third to Ram Lala.